9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 667X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount of Rs. 369 crores by requiring payment in two installments of Rs. 15 crores each so that the amount of Rs. 30 crores is collected by the end of financial year 2012-2013. Since the Commissioner had initially only directed payment of installments of Rs. 15 crores each month, the same should have been continued even by virtue of the subsequent order, particularly, as at the stage of passing the subsequent order, the petitioner had clarified that the entire amount was disputed. That being so, order of the Commissioner dated 08.05.2013 modified to the extent that instead of paying installments of Rs. 80 crores each month, the petitioner shall pay installments of Rs. 15 crores each month. The first installment shall be due on 31.05.2013 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have gone through the petition filed by the assessee and discussed the same with the representative of the assessee, the order of stay of demand passed by the Additional CIT Rang 18 and the instructions of 1914 issued by CBDT for recovery of outstanding tax demand. I am of the opinion that there are exceptionally and compelling circumstances as the assessment order appears to be high pitched and a genuine hardship is likely to be caused to the asessee, this order is being passed by the undersigned. As elaborated in the order dated 16/11/2012 passed by the Additional CIT Range-18 the undisputed demand amounts to Rs. 369 crore. In any case, the assessee has to pay the entire undisputed demand immediately but looking into the hardship which ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to pay at least Rs. 30 crores more (in addition to the Rs. 13 crores already paid by the petitioner) by the end of the financial year 2012-2013. We are informed that the said sum of Rs. 30 crores has been paid by the petitioner. The Commissioner, by virtue of the order dated 11.02.2013 had directed that the same would be reviewed on 10.04.2013. In between, the petitioner had filed a writ petition before this Court being W.P.(C) No.2585/2013. In that writ petition, one of the contentions was that while the petitioner was being directed to pay a sum of Rs. 30 crores, the appeal was itself being delayed on account of the Assessing Officer not furnishing the comments on the written submissions submitted by the petitioner on 11.03.2013 and 21.03 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e petitioner on 11.03.2013 and 21.03.2013. He further stated that the appeal is now fixed for hearing on 26.04.2013 and that the petitioner has till date not received a copy of the comments. After hearing counsel for the parties, we are disposing this writ petition with the direction that the Commissioner shall review the arrangement of stay within two weeks. In the first instance, the petitioner shall appear before the Commissioner on 29.04.2013 at 11:00 a.m. We also direct that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who is seized of the matter shall dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible. The Assessing Officer shall also furnish his comments at the earliest. Till the Commissioner decides the further cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pronouncement by a higher appellate authority or court alters the above situations; (e) reserve a right to adjust refunds arising, if any against the demand. (iii) Payment by installments may be liberally allowed so as to collect the entire demand within a reasonable period not exceeding 18 months. 11. Accordingly, looking into the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the investments in shares have already been attached and the book value of such investments is more than the demand outstanding against the assessee and that if coercive measures are taken to collect the entire demand, it will put assessee in undue hardship, the following arrangement is made: (i) This order is being passed initially for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts are to be for 03 months inasmuch as the order is to be reviewed on 12.08.2013 or on receipt of the order the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), whichever was earlier. 6. We feel that since the Commissioner had initially only directed payment of installments of Rs. 15 crores each month, the same should have been continued even by virtue of the subsequent order, particularly, as at the stage of passing the subsequent order, the petitioner had clarified that the entire amount was disputed. That being so, we modify the order of the Commissioner dated 08.05.2013 to the extent that instead of paying installments of Rs. 80 crores each month, the petitioner shall pay installments of Rs. 15 crores each month. The first installment shall be d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
